ddi2007 - SS Ewaste neg

E-cycling current e-waste fails. Waste is old, decomposed, and dispersed.

John Njagi, grad student in Nairobi of mass communication and media arts,and Kui Kinyanjui , editor for the Business Daily, Business Daily, July 9th, 2007 (“Dealers asked to act on growing electronic waste” http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1824&Itemid=5810)
Through this channel, computers as old as the Commodore 64 that were last used in the United States in the 80s have been shipped to Africa. Often left to rot in expansive dumping grounds, electronic waste contains a wide range of toxins including cadmium, mercury and lead that contaminate water sources and wreak havoc on agricultural land.

The UN says much of the e-waste ends up on garbage dumps where they decompose and release dangerous elements such as lead, canadium, and mercury. CFSK disputes the claim, saying the donated computers could last for at least three years.

Damage has been done. Existing e-waste leaked and the aff can not recover it.

Shawn C. Morton, environmental policy analyst, 1998 (“Hazardous waste trade,” http://www.web.ca/~smorton/waste_trade.html)
One of the problems with the export of hazardous wastes is that it is destined for disposal in countries that have neither the technical expertise nor the facilities to dispose of the waste in an environmentally sound manner. Often these wastes were simply dumped on properties in leaking barrels with environmentally devastating results. Ultimately the waste would leach into the soil and water table causing health and environmental problems for the local areas.

Ewaste is inevitable as long as corporations can dump far away.

Shawn C. Morton, environmental policy analyst, 1998 (“Hazardous waste trade,” http://www.web.ca/~smorton/waste_trade.html)
Another important component in the link between hazardous waste and sustainable development is that of the proximity principle. The principle, espoused by the European Union in its regulation of hazardous wastes, is based on the concept that the closer to the source of production that the waste is dealt with then the greater the likelihood that it will be handled in an environmentally safe manner. By exporting hazardous waste there is less incentive for firms to alter their production methods and for consumers to switch to alternative products that generate less waste. In expanding the distance between its production, consumption and disposal there is less awareness of the environmental consequence that arise from disposing of hazardous waste (out if sight out of mind). However, when waste is disposed of closer to home, -- that is where it is produced and consumed -- this awareness is present. This can ultimately create a demand for both production and consumption patterns that produce less hazardous waste. It was original awareness of the problems associated with hazardous waste that created the existing tough regulatory regime in most Northern countries.

Technological dependence reinscribes the need to dump. The Affirmative doesn’t address the root of the problem.

Illegal dumping happens in Africa.

Taxation solutions oversimplify waste problems offering utopian solutions.

Silvia Ulli Beer , doctorate dissertation for the University of pc. Gallen in economics, 04.05.2004 (“Citizens’ Choice and Public Policy :A System Dynamics Model for Recycling Management at the Local Level” http://www.unisg.ch/www/edis.nsf/wwwDisplayIdentifier/2918/$FILE/dis2918.pdf Pg. 39-40)
Although economics may help give theoretical arguments about why a nation wide policy of
solid waste management could be a cost efficient way of internalizing externalities and
seeking a social optimum in a perfect world, with perfect markets and perfect decisionmakers,
the System Dynamics model approach may help understand complex phenomena of
the imperfect and “faulty” reality. Hence, the SD-SWM-model offers a complementary
theory explaining the observed phenomena.
In this sense, the specific SD-SWM-model may help practically in micro controlling and
in fine-tuning the systems performance, whereas the economic approach may help find
policy principles that would theoretically lead to an “optimal” solution. Furthermore,
economics describes an “optimal solution” and the state of the system in equilibrium
whereas the System Dynamics model focuses on the transition process. In having this focus
it helps to understand the driving forces leading the system from one to another equilibrium.
One strength of economics is its consistent mathematical formalization of the theory.
Therefore, the theory can guide the problem structuring process leading to an intersubjective
explanation and solution that is well understood between economists and can
easily be replicated. However, this may also limit its adequacy for certain issues (see Thaler
2000, Tversky and Kahneman 1974, Kahneman, Knetsch et al. 1986)) and may be seen as
over simplistic (Forrester 2003, Radzicki 2003, Atkinson 2003, Shilling 2003).

SS Ewaste neg - No Solvency